Wonderful! Thank you! The associated problem here is that the error message didn't really help me. I know the developers are busy, but I hope that there's a way to eventually improve the error message for this situation.
Thanks again. Daniel On Tuesday, July 22, 2014 9:22:31 PM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote: > > Inspired by the mighty ModInt example, I tried my hand at making a new > immutable type. I wanted to make a FloatingPoint type that won't drift as > it gets incremented, for use as a time in an integration loop. I've > attached my code. > > The short story is: I try to compare the type's value to a Float64 literal > with @test_approx_eq and I get the following error: > > ERROR: stack overflow >> in <= at promotion.jl:170 (repeats 80000 times) >> while loading >> /Users/dmatz/Data/Projects/simulations/julia/time/integer_times_test.jl, in >> expression starting on line 28 > > > If I manually convert my type to Float64, it of course works. I've > provided a promote_rule to Float64, which seems to automatically make a lot > of operators work. But why does @test_approx_eq not work? The stack trace > doesn't really help. I tried to manually do a <=, and that works just > fine... > > Thanks! > > Daniel >
